LanguageChanges

We are sometimes asked to modify MLton to change the language it
compiles. In short, we are conservative about making such changes.
There are a number of reasons for this.

The Definition of Standard ML is an
extremely high standard of specification. The value of the Definition
would be significantly diluted by changes that are not specified at an
equally high level, and the dilution increases with the complexity of
the language change and its interaction with other language features.

The SML community is small and there are a number of
SML implementations. Without an
agreed-upon standard, it becomes very difficult to port programs
between compilers, and the community would be balkanized.

Our main goal is to enable programmers to be as effective as
possible with MLton/SML. There are a number of improvements other
than language changes that we could spend our time on that would
provide more benefit to programmers.

The more the language that MLton compiles changes over time, the
more difficult it is to use MLton as a stable platform for serious
program development.

We allow these language extensions because they provide functionality
that is impossible to achieve without them or have non-trivial
community support. The Definition does not define a foreign function
interface. So, we must either extend the language or greatly restrict
the class of programs that can be written. Similarly, the Definition
does not provide a mechanism for namespace control at the module
level, making it impossible to deliver packaged libraries and have a
hope of users using them without name clashes. The ML Basis system
addresses this problem. We have also provided a formal specification
of the ML Basis system at the level of the Definition.